This is a podcast for the curious. Strap yourself in for genuine dialogues with people who think deeply and are ready to tackle the big questions, such as broadcaster Terry O'Reilly, fantasy author Guy Gavriel Kay, and journalist Sally Armstrong.

Today’s conversation is, I think, extremely important. We’re
talking about life and death situations for First Nations people in
Canada, and the precarious position that many indigenous people are
in because of inadequate government services. You’ve probably heard
many times that Canada, a prosperous and advanced so-called first
world country, features regions with third-world conditions. Almost
invariably, these parts of Canada are reserves or First Nations
communities.

One of the key principles that Andrea’s organization, the
First
Nations Child & Family Caring Society, fights for is
fairness. If you live in Canada, you should get access to the same
services - and the same level of service - as anyone else. The law
says that this is the case. But the reality is something entirely
different. And moreover, what constitutes a service? Certainly,
health care and education. But what about transportation? Recently,
the bus company Greyhound ceased operations in Western Canada, in
part due to declining demand. But who does this affect the most?
The economically disadvantaged. The disabled. The elderly. And
First Nations people. Yes, we’re talking about a business decision
made in a market economy. We’re talking about staggering
complexities in society, culture, technological displacement, the
role of government, the reduced power of government to take action,
the politics of identity and spending. And we’re talking about the
deeper, more fundamental issues: reconciliation, justice, land,
sovereignty. And yet, as Andrea says, the principle of fairness
itself? That’s simple. So what can we do about it? I think my
conversation with Andrea answers this question, and opens the doors
to many others.

I get a lot of emails about the show, often in reaction to the
topics discussed, and with suggestions for other things we should
talk about - pieces of the never-ending puzzle of what on earth is
going on. One issue has come up more than most, and it’s related to
what we’re talking about today. It’s the debate over what to do
with historic buildings and sites, specifically those named after
or that feature controversial figures. In Canada, one of these
names is John A. MacDonald, a key player in the founding
of Confederation and the country’s first prime minister. MacDonald
was also responsible for crafting and spearheading government
policy towards First Nations people. Openly in the House of
Commons, MacDonald called for bringing indigenous Canadians to the
brink of starvation in order to reduce expenses and get them to
work harder. The policies of his government are still being felt in
Canada today, despite a Truth and Reconciliation
Commission and official apologies.

So what does this mean when we have statues of MacDonald in
public places? Or when schools, hospitals, streets, government
buildings, even pubs bear the man’s name? Some argue that it’s
simple: get rid of him. Replace his name and his image with someone
that represents the diversity of Canada today, or with something
that is more true to Canada’s history before the arrival of
Europeans. It’s actually similar to how many say we should deal
with controversial speakers such as Steve Bannon or Jordan
Peterson: take away the platform.

But, as usual, it’s difficult. Free speech and hate speech are
hard to define and sometimes impossible to separate. Likewise, the
terrible chapters in Canada’s history are what they are, regardless
of what we wish it could be. Should they be given precedent over
other stories? Maybe not. But some believe that if we remove
MacDonald’s name, we’re also taking away the chance to confront and
recognize what he did. And a people who don’t know their history…
well, you know the drill.

Here’s a potential solution: instead of taking away, add
context. A similar, often much more heated and even violent debate
is taking place in the United States, where Confederate statues and
names are abundant in the south - not to mention the Confederate
flag. In some cities, such as Richmond, Virginia, there is a
veritable outdoor museum dedicated to a side in a civil war that
fought to keep slavery. And Charlottesville, Virginia, became
ground zero for the alt-right, white supremacists and even
self-proclaimed neo-Nazis in August 2017 when a statue of
Confederate general Robert E. Lee was to be removed. How do you add
context? It could be a piece of art, or plaques, or statues side by
side, all representing the other narrative, and the narrative of
people today who are deeply offended by symbols they see as racist
and evil. Instead of replacing one story with another, tell both at
the same time. Give voice to the previously voiceless, and let
people figure out their own history.

How will this turn out? How should it turn out? I don’t know.
It’s sensitive. The moral contours are subjective ill-defined, just
like history itself. But what do you think? I’m keen to address
these issues in future episodes, and you can help me by sharing
your own thoughts. Get in touch on social media or by email:
woegopodcast@gmail.com.

Archives

About the Podcast

Your weekly podcast for a world in flux.
Globalization and climate change. The rise of social media and the decline and fall of Blockbuster Video. AI and VR. Donald Trump and Flat Earthers. The world is changing so fast that we can't get a grip on how we got here, let alone where we're headed.
Join Ben Charland as he peels back the headlines to ask, what are the events, characters, forces and ideas that shape the human story today? Have things always been this nuts, or are they getting crazier by the day? Who were those barbarians that took down the Blockbuster Empire? Just what on Earth is going on?